The Washington, DC bar advanced its lawfare on Trump-era Department of Justice official Jeffrey Clark Thursday when one of its committees recommended the attorney be suspended from practicing law for at least two years. The committee also demanded that the D.C. bar keep Clark out of work until he can “show fitness for readmission is an appropriate sanction for what was charged and proven.”
In their 213-page report, Chair Merril Hirsh, Public Member Patricia Mathews, and Attorney Member Rebecca C. Smith accuse Clark of “truly extraordinary recklessness” over claims he violated bar rules by drafting a letter to Peach State officials noting the DOJ “identified significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the [2020] election in multiple States, including the State of Georgia.”
Clark never sent the letter, but the legal licensing association charged him in July 2022 anyway with “attempted dishonesty” and “attempted serious interference with the administration of justice” for considering recommending an investigation of inconsistencies in the 2020 election. He was also named as one of the 19 “co-conspirator” targets in Democrats’ wide-ranging election indictment in Georgia.
The Washington D.C. Court of Appeals Board on Professional Responsibility’s hearing committee acknowledged that Clark was “in a unique position to act” in the aftermath of the 2020 election and “believed it was his duty to do so,” but said he deserves punishment for his legal and protected work history anyway.
The committee conceded Clark is a “highly-credentialed, hard-working lawyer who represents clients tenaciously” who acted sincerely during his tenure at the DOJ. Yet the same D.C. bar that reinstated convicted FBI Russiagate forger Kevin Clinesmith while he was still on probation and has yet to act on a misconduct complaint against First Son Hunter Biden now wants to strip Clark of his place in the legal world until he “recognizes the seriousness of his conduct” and has “taken any step to remedy past wrongs or to prevent future ones.”
“It is admirable, not wrong, to believe in a cause; but it is wrong and dangerous to the public and our legal system to let that belief operate to the exclusion of judgment,” the committee wrote.
Clark’s legal counsel Charlie Burnham, Harry Macdougald, and Bob Destro told The Federalist in a statement that the committee’s report, which they dubbed “unlawful,” has “no legal effect” on Clark right now. That opens the door for them to “pursue multiple appeals to keep it that way.”
“Mr. Clark should have been declared immune from the political weaponization of the Bar launched against him and we have confidence that Mr. Clark will be fully vindicated,” the lawyers said.
The recommendation, they added, “wrongly dives into confidential deliberations shielded by both presidential immunity and executive privilege—matters the Committee’s three volunteers have no power to shred.”
“In fact, the recommendation is an outrageous power grab that began as a partisan political complaint by Senator Dick Durbin. This case never should have been brought; it violates the separation of powers. But it certainly should have been dismissed in light of the Trump v. United States decision issued on July 1, 2024. The U.S. Supreme Court there barred any actor from seeing or reviewing purported facts involving Mr. Clark’s 2020 legal advice. The Hearing Committee ignored its limitations and has now intruded into core presidential duties,” the lawyers continued.
Clark spent the last two years fighting an uphill battle against the “legally and factually ridiculous” targeting scheme. In December, he tried to obtain public documents about election integrity key to his bar defense but was stonewalled by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the DOJ.
In February, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled that Clark did not have to comply with a subpoena from the D.C. bar’s Office of Disciplinary Counsel because it would have violated his executive, law enforcement, deliberative process, and attorney-client privileges, as well as deprive him of his Fifth Amendment rights.
The setbacks continued Thursday, when BPR Executive Attorney James T. Phalen confirmed in a letter to Clark that the D.C. bar wants to indefinitely deprive him of his ability to practice licensed law simply because he prioritized election integrity under former President Donald Trump. The D.C. bar is just one entity among many nationwide that are working to punish dozens of lawyers for giving legal counsel to Trump and Republicans.
“Mr. Clark is an excellent lawyer who served his country honorably across two different presidential Administrations at the U.S. Justice Department, devoting six-and-a-half years of his life to public service,” Clark’s legal team said. “He had a duty to give his best expert advice to President Trump. But it is exactly such advice that Senator Durbin and other political opponents on the left seek to chill, so lawyers will never give candid advice to future Republican Presidents.”
